The standards committee of the Ohio Board of Education has approved a new set of science standards that includes a compromise over how to teach evolution in the state's schools, one that will please creationists more than scientists. According to the revised standards, students should be able to "describe how scientists today continue to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory." The full state board will vote on the standards in December. "Panel approves science guidelines," by Scott Stephens, The Plain Dealer (Cleveland), October 15, 2002

A long article by Diana Schemo in Monday's New York Times outlined some of the ways in which the No Child Left Behind Act is being weakened or skirted by federal, state, and local officials. Several states are moving to ease their standards for academic proficiency to ensure that more children are able to reach them. Principals are not sending letters alerting parents if their children's teachers are not "highly qualified" (while the definition of "highly qualified" is itself being questioned). Many districts are not offering children in failing schools the option to transfer to better schools. (Perhaps in response to this last problem, the U.S. Department of Education this week announced a $600,000 grant to the Black Alliance for Educational Options to develop a public information campaign to reach parents about the choices available to them under the No Child Left Behind Act.) "Law overhauling school standards seen as skirted," by Diana Schemo, The New York Times, October 15, 2002 and "Education Department, BAEO form partnership to reach parents about landmark No Child Left Behind Act," press release, US Department of Education, October 15, 2002

Earlier this week, the California Network of Educational Charters (CANEC) unveiled a new accreditation program in an attempt to introduce a measure of self-evaluation and
-regulation among the network's 300 charter schools. The unprecedented program - which will be piloted by a dozen schools this year, with over 100 expected to participate next year - comes in response to recent press about a handful of "bad apple" charter schools that hurts public opinion about all charter schools and prompted California lawmakers to impose new regulations on them. CANEC will work in conjunction with the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, the primary accreditation organization for public and private schools in the western U.S., to evaluate the schools and offer a seal of approval to those that pass. "Charter schools try self-regulation," by Suzanne Pardington, Contra Costa Times, October 15, 2002

On Saturday, Diane Ravitch challenged chancellor Joel Klein to "bust the monopoly" of New York City's mammoth school system, noting that Klein has thus far dismissed the idea of school choice despite his reputation as a trustbuster. Writing in the New York Daily News, Ravitch urged the former businessman to "begin a revolution" by doing everything in his power to support charters, noting that like a company, if a charter school fails its customers, it loses its charter and closes. "Bust the Monopoly," by Diane Ravitch, New York Daily News, October 12, 2002

P.S. Perhaps Chancellor Klein was persuaded. On Wednesday, he endorsed the creation of more charter schools to stir innovation in the New York City public school system and provide more options to parents. See "Klein touts charter schools," by Carl Campanile, New York Post, October 17, 2002

Everyone agrees that the weak performance of U.S. urban education poses a national crisis. Far too many low income and minority youngsters attend bad schools where they learn too little, are sometimes in danger and are understandably inclined to drop out.

Yet not everyone appreciates the contribution that charter schools can make to easing the urban-education crisis. To the contrary. In hundreds of American cities, school leaders shun the charter option and, in many of these places, have joined the crusade to stamp it out.

Yet charter schools contribute in three ways to the reform of urban education.

First and most obviously, they provide viable educational alternatives - one might even say refuges - for children otherwise trapped in bad public schools and unable to afford private schools. For example, Boston's Academy of the Pacific Rim charter school is the third-highest-scoring secondary school in the city on the 8th grade state proficiency tests - and the two schools ahead of it are selective-admission "exam schools."

The right of low-income children to attend charters in place of chronically underperforming public schools is codified in the No Child Left Behind Act. It was also recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in the recent Cleveland voucher case. And we know that most charters are disproportionately attended by poor and minority youngsters.

Second, the competition posed by charter schools may stimulate improvement in the regular public school system. We know that monopolies are loath to change and that competition is good for them and their clients. By making them more consumer-sensitive, it causes them to become more productive and effective. Kenneth Wong and Caroline Hoxby are but two of the scholars who find that charters tend to induce positive change in public school systems, and that the more there are, the more competition is triggered and the more improvement results. Dayton, Ohio is but one of the places where we can see this happening today.

Third, foresighted urban school systems can harness the charter option as a source of innovation and opportunity for themselves. Because charters are free from some of the regulatory and collective bargaining constraints that retard change in large school systems, they can do things differently. Because they're new schools, they are not burdened with the habits and traditions of old ones. Some school systems have recognized this window and have created charter or near-charter schools as a way of diversifying their education offerings and, sometimes, as a sort of lab in which new approaches can be tried and worthy experiments undertaken - experiments that, if successful, may be infused into the larger school system.

The first and second of these connections - the creation of viable alternatives for children and the salubrious effects of competition - are unwelcome to most urban school systems. They may be good for students, families and communities, but they're painful from the standpoint of school systems, which instead take steps to prevent or minimize them. That is the normal reaction of any monopoly to the onset of competition. It fears loss of market share so it strikes back.

We've seen plenty of that across America as school-system leaders join the army that's trying to halt the charter movement. Perhaps this is best analogized to a child's reaction to the pediatrician's syringe: it's good for you even though it hurts. The injection may cause you to hate the doctor but it also makes you get well. There is mounting research evidence that charter schools are in fact offering education havens for children and parents, places that are small, safe and personal, and often (though not always) places where greater academic gains are being made than in conventional public schools. There is also mounting evidence that the presence of competition stimulates positive change in traditional school systems. The problem is that, because school systems don't like to change, they deny that charters are good for them even when it's true.

I watch these developments with particular care in Ohio, a state with as violent an anti-charter backlash as anywhere in the land - and where urban education is as much in need of reforming as anywhere in the land. The Buckeye State has seen its full measure of negative reactions by school system leaders to connections #1 and #2, even though they may be doing great good for children. What we have not yet seen much of in Ohio is connection #3, the deliberate use of the charter opportunity by school systems themselves as a way to create alternatives, innovate and pioneer.

Some occurred in Cincinnati, where former Superintendent Steve Adamowski spearheaded the creation of several charters within the system. There is a lone example in Dayton, the promising "World of Wonder" conversion charter school. But not much else. Mention charter schools to most Ohio superintendents and school board members and they see red.

Look further afield, however, and we can see urban districts exploiting the charter opportunity. Houston (which just won the first Broad Foundation prize for progress in urban education) has developed dozens of charters within the system and proudly describes this arrangement as follows: "In keeping with its commitment to offering the young people of Houston the best possible education, HISD initiated a system of highly successful charter schools. They range from full-fledged, separate campuses to specialized 'school-within-a-school' programs. Each targets particular learning needs and offers unique instructional opportunities, including dual-language primary learning and multicultural studies. HISD charter schools offer students new approaches to education, yet they benefit from the considerable support services that HISD can supply (online at http://dept.houstonisd.org/charterschools)."

Chicago's public schools have cooperated in creating the maximum number of charters permitted under Illinois law. Tampa and Miami are making imaginative use of the charter option as part of their overall education plans and view charters as legitimate alternatives for families. (See, for example, http://choice.dadeschools.net/Charter/index.html.)

Boston has developed its own charter-like "pilot schools" and Superintendent Tom Payzant has told his team that charters are there to stay and they'd best learn to compete successfully with them. A dozen imaginative charter schools have been started in Oakland as part of a purposeful education reform strategy spearheaded by Mayor (and former California governor) Jerry Brown. San Diego superintendent Alan Bersin has made charters a purposeful part of his own education reform efforts, including a semi-charter conversion high school designed to function under the district umbrella. Colorado Springs has similarly figured out how to use its state's charter law to advance some of the system's own education reform ideas. (You can access the charter school websites through the school system's site. Go to http://www.cssd11.k12.co.us/schools/community_prep.htm, for example, and see a photo of Colorado Springs superintendent Norman Ridder speaking at the graduation of Community Prep Charter School.)

In sum, there is no necessary conflict between charter schools and urban school reform. To the contrary, they can be complementary. A number of American cities are proving it. What is needed to make it work that way is the will, the vision and the leadership. What's needed, above all, is a focus on the interests of children rather than adults.

I write to clarify four issues regarding Edison Schools in a recent Gadfly article written by Allison Cole, "Edison's Year has a Rocky Start" [see http://www.edexcellence.net/gadfly/issue.cfm?issue=38#546]:

1. The article suggests that the financial ratio expectations connected with our recent financing (as described in our recently submitted 10K) should be cause for concern. This is absolutely NOT the case. Financial ratios such as these are normal course for financing deals—it is simply a description of the terms of the deal. As a publicly traded company, our finances are transparent, sometimes leaving ample opportunity for misinterpretation. It important to note that just last week we announced that we are on target to meet all financial requirements and expectations for the year.
   
   
2. Edison's board of directors is not in trouble. To the contrary, there have been changes on it in order for board members to increase their contributions to Edison. In fact, the three board members referenced in the article have increased their investment in Edison Schools in the past few months. In July 2002, Chip Delaney joined the company's executive management team as Vice Chairman. As an employee, Delaney could no longer serve as a member of the Board audit committee so he stepped down in that capacity. He remains a member of the Board of Directors. Jeffrey Leeds and Jonathan Newcombe (Newcombe is a partner at Leeds Weld Co.) stepped down from the Board of Directors in July 2002 when it became apparent that Leeds Weld Co. might be interested in investing in Edison Schools. Subsequently, Leeds Weld Co., through School Services, became a key investor in the $40 million financing deal Edison Schools announced in early August 2002. Board movement is not always a sign of problems.
   
   
3. Our arrangement in Philadelphia has always called for our first payment to come after we (Edison) and the District completed a "stand still agreement" - a document outlining what happens to material investments in the schools should the partnership end early. Stand still agreements, particularly when a lender is involved, can be extremely complicated. In order to be deliberate, both Edison and the Philadelphia district are considering every possible contingency before these papers are finalized. We have always known that our first payment would be contingent on these documents being finalized. While Edison chooses to be deliberate about final business arrangements, services to teachers and children remain smooth.
   
   
4. Regarding the location of our staff in Philadelphia, our model allows for some of our staff to work within schools to be close to students, families, principals, and teachers. Being part of the school community is essential to improving schools. We are hopeful that Superintendent Vallas will continue to support a hands-on approach to collaboration between Edison's staff and the staff at each school.

We, at Edison Schools, encourage the Gadfly's readership to watch for positive changes in the 20 schools that Edison is managing for Philadelphia. Our focus has been on—and will continue to be—infusing schools with additional resources, training teachers and staff, and building achievement managements systems. We do this knowing that it is aligned with our mission, "providing every child with a world class education."

For recent and accurate information on Edison Schools, visit our web site www.edisonschools.com.

Sincerely,

Adam Tucker
VP, Communications
Edison Schools

The current issue of Phi Delta Kappan contains both a screed by the infamous Alfie Kohn on the subject of corporate involvement in education and the latest of Gerald Bracey's annual rants about who he likes and who he doesn't like in American education. Just about everyone who wants to boost standards or foster choice manages to land in the latter category. Though the Kappan occasionally publishes worthwhile stuff (including, once in a while, our own), too often it affords a vivid display of one reason that education reform in America is so difficult: because so many people who write for the field's better known magazines aren't really reform-minded at all. "The 500-Pound Gorilla," by Alfie Kohn, and "The 12th Bracey Report on the Condition of Public Education," by Gerald Bracey, Phi Delta Kappan, October 2002 (not available online, though you can view the table of contents at http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/ktoc.htm)

Writing this time in Educational Leadership, Diane Ravitch offers seven lessons for educators in the aftermath of September 11th. The first of these: it's okay to be patriotic. Ravitch reminds educators that their task "remains the same as it has been for many years: to prepare the students in our charge to sustain our democratic institutions and ideals." Without a solid grounding in critical subjects like American and world history and geography, she argues, our students will not understand the context of the "wanton acts of evil" they witnessed in the terrorist attacks, and will not be able to safeguard our liberty and champion our tradition of freedom. "September 11: Seven Lessons for the Schools," by Diane Ravitch, Educational Leadership, October 2002

No states have voucher initiatives on the ballot this November, but a range of other education issues will be presented directly to voters this fall in different states. A California initiative would force the state to spend more money on before- and after-school programs, a Florida initiative would limit class size, and ballot initiatives in Colorado and Massachusetts would replace bilingual education with English immersion classes. For more see "Education Initiatives Take New Approach," by Pamela Prah, Stateline.org, October 11, 2002.

Achieve, Inc.
Summer 2002

You may be drowning in policy guidance from sundry organizations regarding the implementation of NCLB. Now Achieve has weighed in with a useful 14-page "policy brief" offering welcome tips and state examples under six broad headings (e.g. "building a coherent testing program," "targeting responses to help more low-performing schools succeed"). There may be nothing here that's entirely new to you but it's valuable to have these pointers and illustrations drawn together so lucidly. You can find it on the web at http://www.achieve.org/dstore.nsf/Lookup/PolicyBrief-MeetingChallenges/$file/PolicyBrief-MeetingChallenges.pdf.